Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies
(Sorry Jack Sparrow, wall of text incoming.
)
The question is how will he vote. He gave a very politicians response in his statement and following comments. I don't really think his vote matters though, because even if he votes no, the GOP still very, very likely has the votes to get this through before (or after) election day. I'm betting on before in order to repeal Obamacare on November 10th. Holding a vote after the election potentially allows for a delay past that date. (All this before there's a suitable plan to replace it, I might add, but that might fall on the Democrats again next year. Congrats of repealing Obamacare, you did it, but you didn't replace it guys... SMH.)
I actually support holding a floor vote because that is a President's duty to nominate a candidate to fill an empty seat, and it's the Senate's job to hold hearings and then vote on the nominee. This current situation, however, isn't occurring under normal circumstances and precedent has become subjective, according to Romney.
As we know, back in 2016, just two-months into 2016, Obama did his duty and nominated a candidate when an empty seat came up. But unfortunately, the Senate decided to neglect their duty, the job they were elected to fulfill, back then to set up this troubling political game/precedent.
It would be fair, in turn, for the Senate to balance their 2016 decision out by following their own precedent and allow RBG's seat to be filled next year. As many said back then, to allow the voters to have a say. Of course, all the Republican Senators who agreed to follow their own precedent, being on the record saying so, aren't doing that and are even proudly saying voters can use their words against them. So they've gone from turning the powers of the Senate from a troubling game/precedent back in 2016, now into a dangerous turn in Senate power this year.
It's pure partisan politics. And the next turn of this, the next time Democrats take control of the President and Senate, which could happen in just four months almost to the day, is the strong likelihood of them moving forward with expanding the Supreme Court to 11 (or more) and lower courts in retaliation. I'm not necessarily against this, especially in regard to the lower courts needing more judges, but the potential of this snowballing further and further after every shift in power is very high, and very reckless unless we can get back to some reasonable state.